Lol

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(03-12-2016 04:53 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:43 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  y'all would be lucky to have Southern Miss or LaTech and quit acting like Tulane is all that

Adding Southern Miss and LA Tech to the AAC makes about as much sense as the Big 12 adding Houston.

Big 12 adding Houston makes sense

(03-12-2016 05:09 PM)Jayesseagle Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:53 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:43 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  y'all would be lucky to have Southern Miss or LaTech and quit acting like Tulane is all that

Adding Southern Miss and LA Tech to the AAC makes about as much sense as the Big 12 adding Houston.

Big 12 adding Houston makes sense

Is there a University in Houston, Mississippi? That would make more sense than Houston, Texas.

(03-12-2016 05:09 PM)Jayesseagle Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:53 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:43 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  y'all would be lucky to have Southern Miss or LaTech and quit acting like Tulane is all that

Adding Southern Miss and LA Tech to the AAC makes about as much sense as the Big 12 adding Houston.

Big 12 adding Houston makes sense

not really, it'll be a school like Cincinnati to help West Virginia with travel expenses

Guess I hit a nerve.

They're as good as anyone left that already isn't in AAC. There are no more home run adds, otherwise they would have already been added.

If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? And don't give me Charlotte, UMass, and Old Dominion.

(03-12-2016 05:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Guess I hit a nerve.

They're as good as anyone left that already isn't in AAC. There are no more home run adds, otherwise they would have already been added.

If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? And don't give me Charlotte, UMass, and Old Dominion.

Their football "resurrection" was built through massive numbers of transfers. That's unsustainable.
Basketball -well, they were blown out by the AAC's last place team...and about to go on probation.
And they aren't an institutional fit

(03-12-2016 05:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Guess I hit a nerve.

They're as good as anyone left that already isn't in AAC. There are no more home run adds, otherwise they would have already been added.

If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? And don't give me Charlotte, UMass, and Old Dominion.

Here's why I'm confident the AAC will be the most successful G5 conference---athletic budgets. We, as a group, have the highest conference athletic budget average in the G5. How does S Miss fit into that thinking?

Furthermore---the S Miss athletic budget issue is not going to go away--ever. They have a declning enrollment that just drove a brutal round of budget cuts. Additionally, there is a long standing state law that prevents universities in Mississippi from utilizing school subsidies to athletic departments like other AAC schools utilize to stay competitive. So---that 23 million dollar athletic budget isn't going to rise anytime soon. It is what it is. By the way--Old Dominion may face a similar issue. They now operate under a state law that caps school subsidies to athletic departments (though it doesn't totally outlaw them like the Mississippi law does) to a certain percentage of the budget. Growth in the Old Dominion athletic budget will be largely limited to true organic growth in ODU athletic revenue in future years.

(03-12-2016 05:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Guess I hit a nerve.

They're as good as anyone left that already isn't in AAC. There are no more home run adds, otherwise they would have already been added.

If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? And don't give me Charlotte, UMass, and Old Dominion.

My vote would be Air Force, but that probably will not happen. NIU is also has a great tradition that would fit.

(03-12-2016 05:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? Give me Charlotte or Old Dominion.

I agree. These are two on the east coast that can be good at hoops and grow on the football side. I like ODU the best since they sell out FB games.

(03-12-2016 05:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Guess I hit a nerve.

They're as good as anyone left that already isn't in AAC. There are no more home run adds, otherwise they would have already been added.

If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? And don't give me Charlotte, UMass, and Old Dominion.

Here's why I'm confident the AAC will be the most successful G5 conference---athletic budgets. We, as a group, have the highest conference athletic budget average in the G5. How does S Miss fit into that thinking?

Furthermore---the S Miss athletic budget issue is not going to go away--ever. They have a declning enrollment that just drove a brutal round of budget cuts. Additionally, there is a long standing state law that prevents universities in Mississippi from utilizing school subsidies to athletic departments like other AAC schools utilize to stay competitive. So---that 23 million dollar athletic budget isn't going to rise anytime soon. It is what it is. By the way--Old Dominion may face a similar issue. They now operate under a state law that caps school subsidies to athletic departments (though it doesn't totally outlaw them like the Mississippi law does) to a certain percentage of the budget. Growth in the Old Dominion athletic budget will be largely limited to true organic growth in ODU athletic revenue in future years.

Between 2005 and 2015, USM used between $1.8 million and $3.7 million in state/school funds in its athletic department (budget) each year.

In those years, Old Dominion used about $6K Total.

Yes.

Please add Southern Miss.

No more yankee schools.

(03-12-2016 06:13 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Guess I hit a nerve.

They're as good as anyone left that already isn't in AAC. There are no more home run adds, otherwise they would have already been added.

If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? And don't give me Charlotte, UMass, and Old Dominion.

Here's why I'm confident the AAC will be the most successful G5 conference---athletic budgets. We, as a group, have the highest conference athletic budget average in the G5. How does S Miss fit into that thinking?

Furthermore---the S Miss athletic budget issue is not going to go away--ever. They have a declning enrollment that just drove a brutal round of budget cuts. Additionally, there is a long standing state law that prevents universities in Mississippi from utilizing school subsidies to athletic departments like other AAC schools utilize to stay competitive. So---that 23 million dollar athletic budget isn't going to rise anytime soon. It is what it is. By the way--Old Dominion may face a similar issue. They now operate under a state law that caps school subsidies to athletic departments (though it doesn't totally outlaw them like the Mississippi law does) to a certain percentage of the budget. Growth in the Old Dominion athletic budget will be largely limited to true organic growth in ODU athletic revenue in future years.

Between 2005 and 2015, USM used between $1.8 million and $3.7 million in state/school funds in its athletic department (budget) each year.

In those years, Old Dominion used about $6K Total.

Point taken about athletic budgets. Now what? Please name the G5 school, outside of the MWC (none of whom are joining), that has a comparable athletic budget and, for good measure, a baseball team.

The new school, whoever it is, will be a development project. There's no getting around it.

Please bring us in.

(03-12-2016 05:10 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:09 PM)Jayesseagle Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:53 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:43 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  y'all would be lucky to have Southern Miss or LaTech and quit acting like Tulane is all that

Adding Southern Miss and LA Tech to the AAC makes about as much sense as the Big 12 adding Houston.

Big 12 adding Houston makes sense

Is there a University in Houston, Mississippi? That would make more sense than Houston, Texas.

Houston HS in Chickasaw County. The Hilltoppers.

(03-12-2016 06:54 PM)Beagleagle23 Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:10 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:09 PM)Jayesseagle Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:53 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:43 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  y'all would be lucky to have Southern Miss or LaTech and quit acting like Tulane is all that

Adding Southern Miss and LA Tech to the AAC makes about as much sense as the Big 12 adding Houston.

Big 12 adding Houston makes sense

Is there a University in Houston, Mississippi? That would make more sense than Houston, Texas.

Houston HS in Chickasaw County. The Hilltoppers.

Houston is just a 5 minutes or so drive from Vardaman, Sweet Potato Capital of the World. Beagleagle and Jayesseagle know a Vardaman sweet potato is viewed at the same level as a Vadalia(Ga) Onion.

Mrs oldtiger's family is from Vardaman/Houston area.

Yes, Vardaman sweet potatoes are highly respected.

If we just lose Cincinnati, I'd want us to add NIU (all sports) and VCU (basketball).

IMO we should avoid another CUSA addition, and I think those two programs would be the best way to make up for the loss.

(03-12-2016 06:13 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Guess I hit a nerve.

They're as good as anyone left that already isn't in AAC. There are no more home run adds, otherwise they would have already been added.

If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? And don't give me Charlotte, UMass, and Old Dominion.

Here's why I'm confident the AAC will be the most successful G5 conference---athletic budgets. We, as a group, have the highest conference athletic budget average in the G5. How does S Miss fit into that thinking?

Furthermore---the S Miss athletic budget issue is not going to go away--ever. They have a declning enrollment that just drove a brutal round of budget cuts. Additionally, there is a long standing state law that prevents universities in Mississippi from utilizing school subsidies to athletic departments like other AAC schools utilize to stay competitive. So---that 23 million dollar athletic budget isn't going to rise anytime soon. It is what it is. By the way--Old Dominion may face a similar issue. They now operate under a state law that caps school subsidies to athletic departments (though it doesn't totally outlaw them like the Mississippi law does) to a certain percentage of the budget. Growth in the Old Dominion athletic budget will be largely limited to true organic growth in ODU athletic revenue in future years.

Between 2005 and 2015, USM used between $1.8 million and $3.7 million in state/school funds in its athletic department (budget) each year.

In those years, Old Dominion used about $6K Total.

A S Miss fan was using the law as the reason their budget was so low. I assumed he was accurately describing the situation S Miss faced. Apparently he was waaaaay wrong. My bad for not checking the data myself. The USA-Today athletic finances database shows S Miss with a 9.4 million dollar subsidy last year. So, their budget is low because that's how they chose to allocate available funds. As for Old Dominion, the most recent version of the same data base indicates ODU had a $41 million budget with a $26.7 million subsidy.

(03-12-2016 07:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 06:13 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Guess I hit a nerve.

They're as good as anyone left that already isn't in AAC. There are no more home run adds, otherwise they would have already been added.

If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? And don't give me Charlotte, UMass, and Old Dominion.

Here's why I'm confident the AAC will be the most successful G5 conference---athletic budgets. We, as a group, have the highest conference athletic budget average in the G5. How does S Miss fit into that thinking?

Furthermore---the S Miss athletic budget issue is not going to go away--ever. They have a declning enrollment that just drove a brutal round of budget cuts. Additionally, there is a long standing state law that prevents universities in Mississippi from utilizing school subsidies to athletic departments like other AAC schools utilize to stay competitive. So---that 23 million dollar athletic budget isn't going to rise anytime soon. It is what it is. By the way--Old Dominion may face a similar issue. They now operate under a state law that caps school subsidies to athletic departments (though it doesn't totally outlaw them like the Mississippi law does) to a certain percentage of the budget. Growth in the Old Dominion athletic budget will be largely limited to true organic growth in ODU athletic revenue in future years.

Between 2005 and 2015, USM used between $1.8 million and $3.7 million in state/school funds in its athletic department (budget) each year.

In those years, Old Dominion used about $6K Total.

A S Miss fan was using the law as the reason their budget was so low. I assumed he was accurately describing the situation S Miss faced. Apparently he was waaaaay wrong. My bad for not checking the data myself. The USA-Today athletic finances database shows S Miss with a 9.4 million dollar subsidy last year. So, their budget is low because that's how they chose to allocate available funds. As for Old Dominion, the most recent version of the same data base indicates ODU had a $41 million budget with a $26.7 million subsidy.

The majority of that 9 mill comes from student fees. As far as funds from the state general fund we are allowed 1 million to be spread across all auxiliary depts.

The story that appeared a few years ago about the "massive" shortfall was not accurate at all. At the time that article was written we had played Navy and Uva away and did not receive our guarantee until late April or May. There was one other smaller amount that had not come in. That so called massive shortfall was more like 100k. The sports section of the media is often like their siblings on the news side. They leave out the end of the story.

(03-12-2016 07:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 06:13 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Guess I hit a nerve.

They're as good as anyone left that already isn't in AAC. There are no more home run adds, otherwise they would have already been added.

If AAC loses 1 to go to 11, who else? And don't give me Charlotte, UMass, and Old Dominion.

Here's why I'm confident the AAC will be the most successful G5 conference---athletic budgets. We, as a group, have the highest conference athletic budget average in the G5. How does S Miss fit into that thinking?

Furthermore---the S Miss athletic budget issue is not going to go away--ever. They have a declning enrollment that just drove a brutal round of budget cuts. Additionally, there is a long standing state law that prevents universities in Mississippi from utilizing school subsidies to athletic departments like other AAC schools utilize to stay competitive. So---that 23 million dollar athletic budget isn't going to rise anytime soon. It is what it is. By the way--Old Dominion may face a similar issue. They now operate under a state law that caps school subsidies to athletic departments (though it doesn't totally outlaw them like the Mississippi law does) to a certain percentage of the budget. Growth in the Old Dominion athletic budget will be largely limited to true organic growth in ODU athletic revenue in future years.

Between 2005 and 2015, USM used between $1.8 million and $3.7 million in state/school funds in its athletic department (budget) each year.

In those years, Old Dominion used about $6K Total.

A S Miss fan was using the law as the reason their budget was so low. I assumed he was accurately describing the situation S Miss faced. Apparently he was waaaaay wrong. My bad for not checking the data myself. The USA-Today athletic finances database shows them with a 9.4 million dollar subsidy last year. So, their budget is low because that's how they chose to allocate available funds.

FWIW, I'm not arguing with you in any way. I just think that USM does wonders with the amount of funding it has at its disposal. That athletic department can teach all of our programs lessons. Until their recent stumble, that program got more quality wins per dollar spent than perhaps any in the country.

Every university does it's best to fund athletics in the most appropriate manner and maintain compliance within their local funding statutes. It's a difficult balance, I doubt that USM chooses to underfund athletics. USA Today lists athletic % subsidy at 40%, which is reasonable and within the parameters of most programs at our level.

Below are the state/school funds that USM reported as using from 2014 through 2015, with 2014 being at the top. If you're looking at "subsidies", USAToday also includes "Student Fees" in those amounts, so you're not comparing merely state/university funds.

USAToday merely interoperates the university filings and classifies the numbers as best they can determine. States use limiting athletic subsidies with state funds in differing ways and it's difficult for non-experts to segment the funds in the same manner the university did.

Below are the state/university funds that USM reported used in the athletic department at USM.
$3,464,492 2014
$3,674,201 2013
$1,975,130 2012
$1,930,604 2011
$1,943,793 2010
$1,870,146 2009
$1,775,461 2008
$1,847,594 2007
$2,116,950 2006
$2,234,910 2005